Legal Opinion

Loveridge v. Schillberg

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided March 11, 1977No. 2527-2; 2528-2PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtReed, J.

Plaintiffs John E. Loveridge and Kenneth Harrenstein, both twice convicted felons and parole violators, filed separate actions against the Prosecuting Attorney for Snohomish County and two of his deputies. Plaintiffs sought a writ of mandamus, an award of damages, and attorney's fees and costs for an alleged failure of defendants to furnish minimum term recommendations to the Board of Prison Terms and Paroles. Plaintiffs claimed they were damaged because the board could not act without such a statement in setting their minimum terms; that as a consequence of board inaction they were not…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Imbler v. PachtmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Routh v. QuinnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Anderson v. Pantages Theatre Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1921
  4. Creelman v. SvenningWashington Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Anderson v. ManleyWashington Supreme Court · 1935

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Blanton v. BarrickSupreme Court of Iowa · 1977
  2. Coffel v. Clallam CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1987
  3. Mauro v. County of KittitasCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1980
  4. Filan v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1984
  5. Collins v. King CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1987

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API